By John F. Hill |
A federal jury in Worcester on
Friday awarded $15,000 to a woman who claimed a Worcester police officer threw
her to the ground and held her down during a traffic stop.
The jury found that Worcester
police officer Jeremy Smith violated the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act and the
Fourth Amendment rights of Wakeelah Cocroft during the 2008 incident, according
to the ACLU of Massachusetts, which helped try the lawsuit.
According to court documents, a
car driven by Cocroft's sister, Clytheia Mwangi of Worcester, was pulled over
for speeding around 7 a.m. Dec. 28, 2008, on Park Avenue. Cocroft testified
that Smith approached the car aggressively, screaming at the driver.
As Smith was writing a ticket,
Cocroft left the vehicle to pay for gas, then returned to the car to use the
pump. Smith yelled at her for leaving the car after he had told the women to
stay inside while he returned to his patrol car.
Cocroft said she thought Smith
had been talking only to her sister. The officer told her not to say another
word. Corcroft objected, telling the officer not to speak to her in such an
aggressive manner.
As Cocroft tried to get back
into the car, Smith approached from behind, grabbed her shoulders and threw her
to the ground to arrest her, according to court documents. Smith, who weighed
about 215 pounds, put his knee on Cocroft's back and held her down for several
minutes until another officer arrived.
The jury found that Smith's
actions violated Cocroft's rights by arresting her without probable cause.
"Today's ruling should
spur much-needed reform in the Worcester Police Department," said one of
Cocroft's attorneys, Beverly Chorbajian, in a statement put out by the ACLU.
"The jury's message is loud and clear, and we hope it is received."
Worcester Police Chief Gary J.
Gemme released a statement Friday afternoon, noting that the jury found in
Smith's favor on three counts. His statement, in full:
"The jury in the Wakeelah
Cocroft v. Jeremy Smith case found for Officer Jeremy Smith on three
significant counts -he did not use excessive force in the arrest, violate the
plaintiff's First Amendment rights, or commit an assault and battery. These are
important findings that reinforce our belief that Officer Smith acted
appropriately and professionally in exercising his police powers.
We believe there are legal
grounds to challenge the verdict with regard
to the one finding for the
plaintiff and the $15,000 award.
Our belief is that Officer
Smith lawfully seized the plaintiff and as a
result we plan to appeal this
one finding to the federal district
court."